The story so far

A moment ago I sent an email to another potential teacher-informant. I ended up summarising my current thinking on my research, and I figure it might be helpful to post this more widely to keep you readers up to date. Here'r are the important bits:

I'm interested in how students (say grade 10, for now) understand climate change and climate processes, and how these things can be taught. My intuition is that a visual, interactive process works best, and being a computer scientist an educational computational climate model is what comes to mind.

In my head I keep revising a possible piece of software to build -- though I'm not stuck on building software, of course -- as a teaching tool. At first I figured a simplified climate model that students could tweak parameters on might be useful. Recently I've started to think about providing a laboratory for creating climate models. The idea being that students could build their conceptual model of how the climate works and then execute it to see what the results are on temperature, carbon concentration, etc.. Then, by comparing their model's outputs with historical observations of climate (or maybe with correct model outputs) they could adjust their model. Through this process they'd learn about climate processes in a less didactic fashion, but maybe more compellingly?

Of course, I'm just a fellow concerned about climate change, able to build software, and interested in cognitive models and education [because I believe early education will have great impact]. I don't know a thing about the educational side of things: what makes a compelling interface for students or how much that matters, what gaps there are in the current teaching methods or student knowledge, and how to judge the usefulness of the various ideas I think up.

Part of moving past this is a matter of finding existing research. I've been combing the literature and internet for examples of educational climate models and research on them, but also for some background on climate education, visualisation, and the research coming out of other CS/education projects. There is plenty out there, of course. I'm tracking some of my thinking and discoveries on my blog, my Delicious bookmarks, and my citeulike paper library, if you're interested.

Besides the literature, I'm also interested in finding teachers with whom I can talk to in order to ground my thinking -- to make sure I'm working on a problem that actually exists and in a way that is actually useful. That's where you come in...

I didn't mention, but should have, the serendipity, and opportunity it affords, of the next years' Ontario curriculum exchanging the weather unit with one on climate change.

EdGCM: Educational Global Climate Modelling

This post is really just a tweet. EdGCM is a user-friendly research-quality global climate model that runs on desktop computer and is suitable as an educational resource. It's no longer being distributed, but maybe this is my first bite on a line to a relevant research stream. Stay tuned.

What grade 10's are up to

My "informant" just told me that the grade 10 science curriculum is changing next year: the unit on weather is being replaced by a unit on climate change. Perfect.

Pages 78-79 of the following document give specifics on the learning objectives the ministry has for this new unit:
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/secondary/science910_2008.pdf

Here's the summary:

OVERALL EXPECTATIONS
By the end of this course, students will:

1. analyse some of the effects of climate change around the world, and assess the effectiveness of initiatives that attempt to address the issue of climate change;
2. investigate various natural and human factors that influence Earth's climate and climate change;
3. demonstrate an understanding of natural and human factors, including the greenhouse effect, that influence Earth's climate and contribute to climate change;

Curriculum details for Grades 1-12 can be found through the EcoSchools initiative, with the Grade 10 curriculum resources specifically found here (this file crashes my PDF viewer; I've uploaded a fixed version here).

The EcoSchools documentation includes a list of web resources, but all of them contain very static pages. That is, there is no equivalent of the JCM for the young'uns, though. Hmmm.

Tofu and Flax

'Dunno how to refer to the weekly meetings Alecia and I are having -- maybe we need a name for them, hey? For now I'll just include vegan ingredients in the blog title to clue you in. (Doing so immediately suggests names: Parlsey parley, The Hummos huddle, The tofu talks, etc.)

Anyhow, Alecia and I met on Wednesday and this time we talked more about where my project is heading. It was very helpful --having someone pick away at my waffling, and suggest ways forward. What came out was that if I'm going to ground this project I'll need to start talking to teachers, as well as education and CS/education researchers, since they'll be able to point out what's in the curriculum now and give me some guidance on where best to spend my effort. I'm very fortunate to know a successful highschool teacher (who happens to read ths blog!) and has already been sending me lots of great info. Of course, I'm still lacking a definite research angle to this project, so I'm still worrisomely wandering.

We discussed Alecia's project as well. She's going to find out about what aspects of the NPRI maps blind users need in order to make sense of them. This will give her the appropriate aspects of the map to concentrate on translating into text. I suggested she leaves the question of whether the map interface can be unified to work with both sighted and non-sighted users until she knows more about what non-sighted users need.

3rd week in - Status report

I'm now on my third week of 36[1], and whilst I am covering some ground, I'm worried that I don't have clear topic or plan yet.

Here's a summary of what I have covered over the past two weeks:

• Briefly surveyed visual querying languages and data exploration techniques.
• Looked into teaching tools for children which focus on the visual and the earth sciences. See for instance, The GEODE initiative, Visualising Earth Project, The Earth Exploration Toolbook.  Plus, a foray into the world of educational games, summarised best by the Wikipedia page on Global warming games.
• Recently, research out of the GIS and land planning communities (often from the journal of Computers, Environment and Urban Systems) that touches both on some fascinating climate change visualisations but also on the impact of visualisations for citizens and policy makers.  See in particular, this paper (Sheppard, 2005).
• Looking into how climate scientists work, and the software they produce.  (via informal interviews[2], various papers, and project websites.

Climate modelling-wise, I have a basic grasp of the issues and the players.  As for communicating the science of climate change, or building an educational tool, I'm feeling lost.  Here's why:

1. I haven't narrowed down my audience.  As Steve mentioned to me the other day, I'll need to narrow down the scope by picking an audience: is it grade 10 students, or climate scientists, or policy makers, etc...  You'd think I'd have decided this already by the way I've been writing and talking about educational tools, but I haven't.  I'm partly still holding out for:
2.  a way to ground the project.  I can (relatively) easily come up with a variety of problems which my research could seek to answer, but that work is not satisfying to me unless i can see that the problems have real-world relevance[3].  At the moment, the problem of 'an educational climate-change tool for highschool students' is nebulous: I'm not sure where the necessary work to be done is, how best to proceed in finding it, or how to judge the relevance of the plans that I do come up with.  Maybe since I've only been at this for a week I still haven't struck upon the right line of existing research, but maybe also this is exacerbated by the fact that:
3. this is unfamiliar territory for me.  .  The way I've been posing the problem so far, none of my CS education is of help to me here.  I can talk to you usefully about code metrics, software design, compilers, and usability but I'm a babe in the woods when it comes to communicating science.  Maybe I need to work harder to reframe the problem with more of an SE angle (though that depends a bit on #2), and maybe also recognise that:  
4. this is unfamiliar territory for my colleagues.  As far as I know right now, my advisors, students in the SE group, and other folks in the CS department have very little background in this area, so I'm flying through the literature solo.  Steve mentioned he thinks the SE of educational tools is a rather rare research area, but he did have a few leads on other researchers out there.

What now then? Here's what I'm thinking:

• Continue to explore the research on communicating science, and the impact of climate-change visualisations.
• Get in touch with other researchers looking into educational tools.
  
• Talk with folks who are "on the ground" and trying to educate on climate change impacts (e.g. realclimate.org, Bill McKibben).  
  
• Continue talking with my SE colleagues to discover more of an SE angle.
• Consider abandoning the educational idea, and switching to a topic that's more familiar to me and my colleagues.  Steve mentioned the defect density in climate models is lower than various comparably-sized projects.  Finding out why might expose something interesting about the climate scientists SE process.

---

[1] Or 32, if I finish by the end of August.  

[2] Recently removed from this blog.

[3] I've talked about this before.  Note, that I'm very open to the idea that my research leads nowhere, I'm just very uneasy with my research starting from nowhere!

Struggling to write

One of my colleagues is struggling to write.  I struggle with writing too.  In the past it was much worse: I've come close to failing courses because of simply not being able to write.  It's really frustrating.  Writing is still painful for me and I'm by no means a writing guru, but for what it's worth, here is what works for me:

• Short blocks of writing time.  Sometimes I can write for several hours, but often I lose my focus after about 20-30 minutes.  I need to actually leave my computer to refresh myself.  Often I take a walk somewhere.
• Sentence at a time (even word at a time) writing.  Sometimes I notice myself stuck at certain point.  My thoughts are murky, I'm re-writing a sentence over and over again, or I'm not even writing anything I'm just feeling terrible about what I will have to write next.  It's at these times I forget about the rest of the piece and simply write the next sentence. As if after writing it I will be finished.  Sometimes I need to focus on writing the next word.
• Muck-writing.  I've just always called it this.  When I'm stuck I'll often open a new document and write something to throw away.  I make sure to hold myself to no standards of writing what so ever, just as long as I'm writing something.  Often I imagine it as my journal, so I speak to myself, and write questions to myself about the topic I'm writing about, and then I answer them.  After doing this for a bit I've often worked through some murky thoughts and I have some momentum for writing.
• Sentence push-through.  This is like muck-writing but on the sentence scale.  If I'm stuck at a sentence it can help me to just decide to write something, even if it comes out as something to throw away.  As long as the thought is there.
• Ad-hoc notes.  As I write I usually switch between writing prose and jabbing out point form notes about what I'm going to write about next.  The notes are just reminders to myself.  If don't write these notes down, I often get cluttered and stall, worrying that I'll forget the awesomeness I want to say next.  
• Having Conversations first.  Like muck-writing, sometimes I need to write a few emails or have conversations with people about the subject before I articulate anything in writing.  Sometimes I cover more ground when I talk.  
• Staying relaxed.  This is probably the most important part for me.  I often get really tense when I write.  I hold my tension by holding my breath or straining my own breathing, tightening my stomach, pressing my tongue up against the roof of my mouth, furrowing my brows, and raising my shoulders.  
  
  If I relax all of these points of tension I usually feel much more able and willing to write.  For me, relaxing takes real concentration and time: I'll often slip back into one of these "poses" without realising it.  I typically have to stop for a few minutes to relax every point and then I have to continually watch myself as I start writing again.

So after writing this, I'm curious to here from other folks.  What works for you?  I'm sure this discussion has been had many times over, I'd be grateful for links to writing resources you've found helpful.

Vegan Pancakes!

In response to Alecia's post (*ahem*: my new best friend's post) on our conversation about her project, I'll just jot down some of my mental notes.

First off, the problem: to make the maps of pollutant release data from NPRI (or any other maps, really) accessible. More specifically, to make the NPRI data as useful for non-sighted users as for sighted users -- and this means making some of the implicit information a sighted person gets from a map accessible to a non-sighted user. As I understand it, since the maps are displayed as images, then the (only?) accessibility mechanism that Alecia can use is the longdesc attribute of the image. So, the problem is partly one of coming up with a meaningful textual description of a map. A few other constraints: the web interface ought to be unified: the same for both sighted and non-sighted users; to be meaningful the text description can't be overly long (i.e. it ought to only contain relevant information, whatever that means. see below:).

• "...implicit information...": we talked a bit about what this means, and it seems like it means just about anything you care to say is in the map. So, the clustering of smoke stacks around a major waterway is implicit because just by looking at the map you can pick out the cluster -- even though the cluster isn't represented as a cluster in the NPRI data. Um, even things like 'major waterway' is implicit, in a way, because it's not part of the NPRI data but it does appear on one of the other layers of the map. The amount of implicit information is practically, well, infinity+1, so trying to include all of it in a longdesc is not an option. So what to include then? Hrm.. accessible cartography's own frame problem.
  
  The scenario I think we're both assuming here is one of a Google maps type map which shows all sorts of terrain details, street details, etc..., and then overlayed on that is the NPRI data. A sighted person can ask and answer all sorts of queries on her own, just by looking at the map and visually sifting through the implicit data.
  
  One way to constrain the amount of information to put in the longdesc we discussed is to have a UI where users can express what they want to find explicitly. Once they state that the system gives 'em an appropriate map. In this way, whether they're sighted or not, we know enough about what not to put into the description and what to include, so as to only include relevant features.
  
• Subproblem 1: So, if we run with the "task-oriented" UI that elicits the user's goal, then we have to design it well. There are probably another infinity+1 user questions, but knowing maybe they fall roughly into a few classes that the UI could be specially designed for (e.g. questions about locality: "what waterways are closest (5,10,25,.. Km) to a particular smoke stack"). User study, or mining the NPRI advanced query tool, maybe?
• Subproblem 2: "...a meaningful textual description of a map...": Okay, once you have the relevant aspects of the map in hand, then you have the problem of turning into a sensible text description. I'd think there was work done on this already....
• "...the web interface ought to be unified...": I really appreciate this point. I didn't at first, since it seemed intuitive to just split things up. One question I have for Alecia is whether she thinks it's okay to sneak in some features that are particularly useful for non-sighted users? For instance, maybe the default map displays all sorts of layers that aren't included in the longdesc. It's only when the user selects these layers to be, say, highlighted in someway, that they're actually included in the textual description. Is that fair game?
  
• Exploration: one thing I thought about after our meeting was about making the accessible version of the map open to exploration. As we were talking I immediately zoomed in on the task-oriented UI as a way to narrow down the map detail, but maybe a user isn't coming to the site with a specific task in mind, maybe they just want to explore the data in a less structured way... I don't know what this means exactly, but I guess I'm thinking of how sometimes patterns just pop out of a picture (e.g. clusters) when you're not looking for them. Thinking about how to include exploration into accessible maps might be out of scope for Alecia's project, but it sure sounds interesting.